Page:Keil and Delitzsch,Biblical commentary the old testament the pentateuch, trad James Martin, volume 1, 1885.djvu/1221

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

that were related to Israel by descent, but had risen up in hostility against it at that time. Moab stands in the foremost rank, not merely because Balaam was about to announce to the king of Moab what Israel would do to his people in the future, but also because the hostility of the heathen to the people of God had appeared most strongly in Balak's desire to curse the Israelites. מואב פּאתי, “the two corners or sides of Moab,” equivalent to Moab on both sides, from one end to the other. For קרקר, the inf. Pilp. of קוּר or קיר, the meaning to destroy is fully established by the parallel מחץ, and by Isa 22:5, whatever may be thought of its etymology and primary meaning. And neither the Samaritan text nor the passage in Jeremiah (Jer 48:45), which is based upon this prophecy, at all warrants an alteration of the reading קרקר into קדקד (the crown of the head), since Jeremiah almost invariably uses earlier writing in this free manner, viz., by altering the expressions employed, and substituting in the place of unusual words wither more common ones, or such as are similar in sound (cf. Küper, Jerem. libror, ss. interpres atque vindex, pp. xii.ff. and p. 43). - כּל־בּני־שׁת does not mean “all the sons of Seth,” i.e., all mankind, as the human race is never called by the name of Seth; and the idea that the ruler to arise out of Israel would destroy all men, would be altogether unsuitable. It signifies rather “all the sons of confusion,” by which, according to the analogy of Jacob and Israel (Num 24:17), Edom and Seir (Num 24:18), the Moabites are to be understood as being men of wild, warlike confusion. שׁת is a contraction of שׁאת (Lam 3:47), and derived from שׁאה; and in Jer 48:45 it is correctly rendered שׁאון בּני.[1]
In the announcement of destruction which is to fall upon the enemies of Israel through the star and sceptre out of the midst of

  1. On the other hand, the rendering, “all the sons of the drinker, i.e., of Lot,” which Hiller proposed, and v. Hoffmann and Kurtz have renewed, is evidently untenable. For, in the first place, the fact related in Gen 19:32. does not warrant the assumption that Lot ever received the name of the “drinker,” especially as the word used in Gen 19 is not שׁתה, but שׁקה. Moreover, the allusion to “all the sons of Lot,” i.e., the Moabites and Ammonites, neither suits the thoroughly synonymous parallelism in the saying of Balaam, nor corresponds to the general character of his prophecies, which announced destruction primarily only to those nations that rose up in hostility against Israel, viz., Moab, Edom, and Amalek, whereas hitherto the Ammonites had not assumed either a hostile or friendly attitude towards them. And lastly, all the nations doomed to destruction are mentioned by name. Now the Ammonites were not a branch of the Moabites by descent, nor was their territory enclosed within the Moabitish territory, so that it could be included, asHoffmann supposes, within the “four corners of Moab.”